Sunday, 16 October 2016

A few observations on the newly released
so-called Science Literature Review on “Biosolids”

A note about terminology – I will be
using the accurate phrase “sewage sludge” throughout my writing, as the
industry and government term “biosolids” is a PR spin, used to present this
waste, which is full of toxins, in a better light. I am not interested in supporting
this deceptive language.

As John Werring perceptively points
out, the opening paragraph of this document sets the stage for everything that follows:

“Biosolids are treated and stabilized
wastewater treatment residuals. In BC, this material is largely beneficially
re-used as a soil amendment in agriculture or other applications, including
landscaping and site reclamation.” This is PR speak – not science! The very
concept of its being “beneficial” is what is at stake here – it is not a
given!! The bias is palpable throughout this document.

What is most obvious about this review
is just how one-sided it is. It is not by any means an objective look at relevant
science dealing with the risks associated with the land disposal of sewer
sludge. When a review puts forth only documents which support a pre-determined
outcome, it can only be seen as propaganda. Science and objectivity have gone
out the window. This review is nothing more than a cherry-picked summary of
articles that supports the government’s and industry’s agenda. There are many
scientists who argue an opposing view to those collected in this booklet - and
argue that disposing of a city's toxic sewage in this manner presents a serious
threat to health. Obviously they were not included as they individually and
collectively raise all kinds of red flags concerning the practice of land
disposal of sewer sludge (See a selection of overlooked peer-reviewed articles
printed separately).

Dr. Richard Honour has offered a few observations
on this review. His comment are as follows:

Notes from the Review Document:

1.“The World Health Organization (WHO) defines a
Risk Factor as “any attribute, characteristic or exposure of an individual that
increases the likelihood of developing a disease or injury” (WHO 2016).”

Comment:
Any person or life form in any environment that is exposed to sewage sludge,
whether in air, water, soil or food, is placed at Risk for disease or injury by
the fact that sewage sludge includes the accumulated toxic wastes from all
human activity. These wastes include industrial and commercial chemicals,
medical wastes, domestic wastes, meaning from households and small businesses,
pharmaceutical and personal care products, infectious agents, and stormwater
runoff, including from all impermeable surfaces, such as highway and road
surfaces, parking lots, walkways, runways, rooftops and otherwise constructed
sites. The wastewater treatment process separates toxic chemicals, infectious
agents and other materials from raw sewage, and then concentrates them in
sewage sludge at elevated levels. Few chemicals and microbes are destroyed in
the wastewater treatment process, but are transported to disposal sites in the
living environment. While in the treatment plant process, and subsequently at
the disposal location, many microbes are killed, while others are amplified by
re-growth in the disposed sludge environment. Also, antibiotic-resistant forms
of infectious disease agents share their gene sequences with other microbes,
thereby conferring their resistance characteristics to other microbes, thereby
increasing the pool of resistant infectious agents. Similarly, many chemicals
are degraded, but many new chemicals are formed newly in sludge, producing yet
more chemicals, many with even greater toxicity. Typically, a few microbes and
chemicals (and metals) are monitored, but only a few of the tens of thousands
of current and novel infectious agents and chemicals disposed on the land and
in our waters in land-disposed sewage sludge are monitored. All of the
microbes, chemicals and metals in sewage sludge are valid Risk Factors for any
person or life form in any environment exposed to sewage sludge, and that
includes the environment itself. The only method of eliminating the Risk or the
Risk Factors in sewage sludge is by Thermal Decomposition, with proper disposal
or treatment of the resulting ash and gasses. Composting may dilute and
mitigate the Risk from infectious agents and toxic chemicals, but the Risk
Factors are not eliminated; composts that include sewage sludge assume the
toxicity characteristic of the sewage sludge in proportion to the amount of
sludge included. Once any amount of sewage sludge is included in any compost,
the compost can no longer be considered as being Organic.

2.“There are three main risk factors that
determine the risk from organic contaminants in the environment: Persistence,
Bioaccumulation, Toxicity (Arnot and Gobas 2006; Clarke and Cummins 2015;
Government of Canada 1999 2000; USEPA 1999).”

Comment:
Please note that the Canadian Government recognizes that three main Risk
Factors “determine the risk from organic contaminants in the environment:
Persistence, Bioaccumulation and Toxicity.” Note also that all of the
contaminants included in the subject review fall within one or more of the
stated categories that determine Risk: They Persist and Bioaccumulate in the
environment, and they are Toxic.

3.“The
Canadian Environmental Protection Act (1999) states that a substance is toxic
if it enters the environment in a concentration or quantity that will have or
may have immediate or long term harmful effects on the environment or its
biological diversity, constitute or may constitute a danger to the environment
on which life depends, and constitute or may constitute a danger in Canada to
human life or health.”

Comment:
Nearly all of the infectious agents, toxic chemicals and toxic metals found in
nearly any sewage sludge were addressed by this Review. In general, a large
portion of the chemicals and microbes detected in the sludges, “have or may
have an immediate or long term harmful effect on the environment or its
biological diversity, constitute or may constitute a danger to the environment
on which life depends, and constitute or may constitute a danger in Canada to
human life or health.” The results of the Literature Review by LRCS for the
Canadian Government describes clearly that the practice of land disposed sewage
sludge must be banned in Canada, and that sewage sludge that is mixed, blended
or combined in any way with compost must not be applied to any food crops or
applied to any land that may leach or flow to any surface or ground waters.
While the Review collected and evaluated a large portion of the relevant
literature, our finding by review of additional literature support further that
the practice of land-disposed Toxic Sewage Sludge must be banned in the better
interests of human and environmental health. Any and all release of Toxic
Sewage Sludge into our living environment places us all at risk, now and in the
future. When considering the toxics in Toxic Sewage Sludge, it must be
appreciated that some acute diseases may display clinical manifestations in the
short-e-term, such as in days, weeks or months, but the clinical presentation
of chronic diseases, such as neurological disorders, cancer, metabolic
disorders or immune disfunction-related illnesses, may not appear for decades.
Who will be responsible for the cancers that develop in the elderly, following
a lifetime of exposure to toxic waste? Who will be responsible for the diseases
of children who were exposed pre-birth, or even by mechanisms of environmental
epigenetics, perhaps more than a generation previously? Exposure to toxic waste
is slow genocide.

-Richard Honour
The Precautionary Group

Dr Thomas Maler has also read over the review
document, and has made the following observations:

Summary of my comments on the Literature review of risks relevant to the
use of biosolids and compost from biosolids with relevance to the Nicola Valley,
BC

The generally arid climate of
the Nicola Valley does NOT reduce the risks associated
with application of biosolids on land. There is no such a thing as “beneficial”
use of biosolids on land, because the risks always outweigh any
benefits. It is impossible to test the composition of biosolids, because there
are approx. 30,000 different chemicals in sludge and nobody can test them
all. This report cautions about monitoring 13 chemicals, what about the
29,987 other ones? Also, applying the biosolids in the summer when it
rains less is bad logic, it will rain eventually, the chemicals don’t go
away, they will be there to leach into the water when it rains. Best way to
avoid contamination water and land is NOT to apply the sludge at all.

Applying sludge to land is not the
most pragmatic approach to managing it; the most pragmatic approach is to
gasify this toxic sludge. Nutrients from the sludge generated in some far away
cities can’t be returned to land by applying sludge, because it contains more
toxins than nutrients. Any nutrients are contaminated with toxins. New Organic
Matter recycling regulations (OMRR) regulations for 2016 should NOT include
sludge/biosolids. The dangers of sludge on land can’t be reduced by source control.
Perhaps in 100 years we will reduce some dangerous chemicals that go into
sewage, but today in 2016 it is not possible.

Water soluble contaminants are NOT
always reduced in all sewage treatment plants, only in tertiary with Advanced
Oxidation (AO) of the effluent, so the sludge will still contain huge amounts
of water soluble as well as water insoluble contaminants. Composting of the
sludge does NOT significantly reduce the dangers of those 30,000 different
chemicals in sludge.

The whole review does NOT even mention
Superbugs that breed in sewage treatment plants, and composting will certainly
NOT diminish their dangers. The antibiotic resistance in Superbugs is spread
from one bacterium to another via small circles of DNA called plasmids and they
will NOT be destroyed by composting; plasmids can survive being shot
into space and reentry back to earth, so they will certainly survive a bit of
heating while composting sludge.

The way to reduce risks from sludge
and get energy from them is to not put them on land, but gasify them and
harvest the energy from them in a form of a syngas which can be used to
generate electricity.

The greatest threat posed by
application of sewer sludge (or biosolids as they like to call it to make it
look better) is contamination of both land and water with approximately 30,000
chemicals of unknown nature and toxicity. Nobody has the ability to measure and
determine the toxicity (as well as degradation) of so many chemicals, most of
them being synthetic ones that nature has no way to degrade or remove them, and
even minor quantities can have disastrous effects on the land and water.These chemicals can get washed away into
streams, lakes and the ocean as well. The safety threat posed by these
chemicals, metals and Superbugs has NOT been addressed by this review; the
focus of the review is to justify this reckless practice, so that it can
continue with government approval. It defies logic to produce a document, under
the guise of scientific review, that justifies a dangerous practice where all
of these dangers can be avoided by simply not applying the sludge/biosolids on
land. We can use much less dangerous fertilizers on land and use the sludge
instead to generate electricity and charcoal in a gasifier.

Thomas Maler, Ph.D. (chemistry,
biochemistry, molecular biology)

Finally, I would like to include here
some passages from a very recent hearing in the USA on the risks of
land-applied “biosolids”

Prof. Caroline Snyder speaks at
the House Democratic Policy CommitteeRe: Public Hearing on
sewage sludgeDate: August 29, 2016

My name is Caroline
Snyder. I am emeritus professor at the Rochester Institute of Technology where
I designed, administered, and taught interdisciplinary environmental science
courses and chaired the Department of Science, Technology, and Society.

Land-applied municipal sewage sludge (biosolids) is a highly complex and
unpredictable mixture of biological and chemical pollutants. Most of the
man-made chemical compounds in commerce today - with 1000 new ones added
annually - end up in sewage, and many of those, concentrate in the resulting
biosolids . They include carcinogens, mutagens, neurotoxins, endocrine
disrupters, solvents, pharmaceuticals, radioactive waste, leachates from
landfills and superfund sites, as well as disease causing and antibiotic
resistant pathogens. Upgrading and building improved treatment plants that will
remove more pollutants from sewage, will cause sludge to become even more
contaminated. Biosolids generated in our large industrialized urban centers -
and 84% of land-applied sludge originates in those centers - is very likely the
most pollutant- rich waste mixture of the 21st century.

The number of
individuals and organizations that oppose land application is growing. There
isn’t a community in the country that welcomes the arrival of sludge trucks.
Many farmers are no longer taken in by the brochures and videos that promise
instant savings and high yields from this free mislabeled "natural
organic" fertilizer. Over a hundred environmental organizations - many supporting
sustainable farming practices - oppose growing food and forage on
biosolids-treated land. Among them are the Sierra Club, the Natural Resources
Defense Council, the Rodale Institute, the Institute for Agriculture and Trade
Policy, Western Growers, the National Farmers Union, the Food Rights Network,
and the Organic Consumers Association. All of these organizations depend on
impartial scientific information to form their policy positions.

A few observations on the testing done on
“biosolids” in the Nicola Valley.

As we had
predicted, the contaminants that are really of concern were not even look at in
the “Sampling Project” - superbugs, prions, nanomaterials, microplastics, pharmaceuticals
and personal care products, (PBDEs) Flame retardants (PBDEs) etc. One does not
have to wonder why – again, it would not support their pre-determined outcomes.
They simply didn’t want to look for toxins they didn’t want to find. This point
is key to understanding why this government decided to relegate the First
Nations participation in this study to the status of “observers” – the last
thing they wanted was to have John Werring of the Suzuki Foundation, chosen by
the Chiefs to help with the testing process, to have free reign on sampling –
and very likely reproduce the dramatically toxic results he got back from the
initial tests the previous year.The
Chiefs would not be mere observers, but wanted input – wanted objective, arm’s
length scientists at the table. Alas, the government could not allow that! The
Chiefs had no option but to leave this biased project.

A small sample of the peer-reviewed studies overlooked by
the so-called Literature review

Highlights:
"Biosolid amendment greatly enhances persistence of triclosan and
triclocarban, likely due to enhanced sorption or decreased chemical
bioavailability. This finding highlights the importance to consider the effect
of biosolids when evaluating the environmental risks of these and other
biosolid-borne PPCPs."

Highlights:
"Land application of biosolids or compost constitutes an important route
of soil contamination by emerging contaminants such as acetaminophen and
sulfamethoxazole. Addition of biosolids or compost appreciably accelerated the
formation of bound residue, likely due to the fact that the organic material
provided additional sites for binding interactions or introduced exogenous
microorganisms facilitating chemical transformations. This effect of biosolids
or compost should be considered in risk assessment of these and other emerging
contaminants."

5.“Soil contamination by organic micropollutants”

2015,Vodyanitskii.

Highlights:
"The input of organic micro and nano-pollutants into the environment has
increased in recent years. Emerging pollutants are defined as new chemicals
without regulatory status and which impact on environment and human health are
poorly understood. The list of emerging compound classes consists of
pharmaceuticals, steroid and hormones, surfactants, flame retardants,
industrial additives and agents, gasoline additives. There are two main
potential routes of environmental exposure associated with these compounds: the
land application of municipal biosolids (typically to agricultural fields) and
wastewater use in irrigated agriculture. These pollutants contaminate
groundwater, soil and are transferred to plants. Drugs have especially strong
influence on soil biota (bacteria, earthworms and others). In contaminated soil
microorganism reaction to these compounds is determined not only by the
composition and amount of emerging pollutants but geochemical and environmental
factors."

Highlights:
"Engineered nanomaterials (ENMs) are entering waste streams in increasing
quantities as a result of their use in an increasing variety of consumer
products employing nanotechnology.1 The majority of these ENMs have been shown
to partition to the sludge within wastewater treatment plants (WWTP), and there
is a risk of environmental harm in agroecosystems where biosolids are
land-applied as fertilizer, which has yet to be fully evaluated. While
regulations exist that limit the land application of biosolids that contain
elevated concentrations of certain metals, these regulations do not
specifically consider the incorporation of metal-containing
nanomaterials."

"While the
metal concentrations used in this study are high relative to near-term
predicted soil ENM concentrations, we have clearly demonstrated that there is a
distinct plant and microorganism response as a result of exposure to biosolids
containing ENMs compared to biosolids containing bulk/dissolved metal of the
same composition. This result suggests that soil accumulation of ENMs could
potentially affect critical ecosystem services, agricultural productivity, and
ultimately human well-being."

Highlights:
"The field of nanotechnology is developing rapidly, and engineered
nanomaterials (ENMs) are being incorporated into an increasing number of
industrial and consumer products. The ENMs within these products are being
released into the environment, which raises concerns about their possible
impacts on human and ecosystem health."

"In summary,
this study provides the first comprehensive insight into the toxicogenomic
responses of M. truncatula grown in soils amended with aged biosolids
containing a mixture of ENMs (Ag, TiO2, and ZnO). Considering the results from
the companion study,18 the gene expression patterns are consistent with the
hypothesis that inhibition of nodulation by ENM exposure was a result of plant
toxicity rather than microbial toxicity, particularly because population
densities of S. meliloti were similar in the bulk/dissolved and ENM treatments.
We identified multiple genes involved in nodulation and inorganic nitrogen
metabolism that were down regulated. In addition, genes involved in oxidative
stress response were up-regulated. The companion study showed that Zn
concentrations and uptake were higher in shoots from the ENM treatment than in
the bulk/dissolved treatment while Ti and Ag concentrations were not significantly
different.18 The present study showed that several genes involved in metal
binding and Zn homeostasis were up-regulated. Taken together, these findings
suggest that inhibition of growth and nodulation in M. truncatula exposed to
ENM treatment is likely the result of enhanced bioavailability of Zn ions in
the biosolids-amended soil containing aged ENMs resulting in
phytotoxicity."

Highlights:
"This study indicates that some CECs are sufficiently persistent and
mobile to be vertically transported into the soil column following biosolids
applications to the land surface, even in semiarid regions"

"Eggen et
al. (2011) reported uptake of pharmaceuticals by plants (carrots, wheat and
barley cereals, meadow fescue, turnip rape seed) and negative effects on growth
and development of carrots; however, the wheat samples from the Colorado study
were not analyzed for pharmaceutical CECs. Holling et al. (2012) reported pharmaceutical
and triclosan uptake by cabbage roots and aerials."

"Triclosan,
a synthetic antimicrobial compound, was persistent in biosolids through the 180
days of sampling (Figure 3). Large concentrations in the first (top) soil
interval dissipated little over time."

"Concentrations
of 4-nonylphenol (sum of all isomers), a detergent or metabolite, were
substantial in the Colorado biosolids (approximately 200 ppm) and persisted
through at least 180 days post-application"

"the
persistence of this CEC in biosolids and soil indicates the potential for
long-term environmental effects."

"A
plasticizer and flame retardant, TBEP, was detected in biosolids at relatively
small concentrations compared to other CECs but was consistently detected in
biosolids through 180 days post-application"

"The results
of this study indicate that CECs in biosolids persisted in a real
field-application environment. Between 180 and 468 days post-application,
select CECs migrated deeper into the soil profile or were taken up by plant roots."

"This study
demonstrates that agronomic applications of biosolids result in detectable
concentrations of CECs in soil, and that CECs can persist in surficial
biosolids and in soil-biosolid mixtures at detectable concentrations on time
scales exceeding one year, particularly under the semiarid conditions present
at this study site."

Highlights:
"Accumulation of organic contaminants implies a risk to not only earthworm
populations but also many vertebrate species feeding on earthworms. So far
information about the accumulation of PFASs by earthworms from soil is quite
limited."

"land
application of biosolids not only increases the OM contents, but also results
in the accumulation of PFASs in soils."

"Earthworms
may take up contaminants from soil and porewater, both through their skin
(dermal) and by ingestion (oral). It is assumed that only contaminants that can
be released from
soil/sediment are available to biological receptors.....The results verified
that the soil PFOS and PFOA concentrations and soil OM content ([OM]) are two
key factors controlling the bioavailability of PFOS and PFOA in soils."

"These
suggested that soil concentration and OM content dominated the bioavailability
of PFASs in soils. Soil pH and clay content appeared relatively unimportant for
PFOS and PFOA bioavailability....The results of this study demonstrated that
contamination of PFOS and PFOA in soils as a result of biosolids land
application led to accumulation of PFOS and PFOA in earthworms with higher
concentration of PFOS than that of PFOA."

Highlights:
"The large diversity of viruses that exist in human populations are
potentially excreted into
sewage collection systems and concentrated in sewage sludge. "

"Two
important, novel contributions can be drawn from this work’s results. The first
is the broad diversity of human viruses revealed in the sludge samples. In
every sample surveyed, the degree of viral pathogen diversity is greater than
had been previously demonstrated in any environmental or wastewater sample. The
realistic implications of this diversity include the need to consider a broader
selection of viruses in environmental fate and transport studies, and
importance of considering multiple human exposure routes to sewage sludge and
wastewater. For the second major contribution, this work demonstrates the
utility of metagenomic approaches for viral pathogen identification."

"The results
of this study serve to expand our view on the type, occurrence and abundance of
viral pathogens in raw sewage sludge and class B biosolids. These results
strongly suggest that current regulations for pathogens in sewage sludge that
focus on fecal coliform indicators or the presence of Enterovirus, do not
capture the full degree of pathogen diversity to which the public may be
exposed during biosolids land application. Emerging viruses including
Parechovirus, Klassevirus, Bocavirus, and Coronavirus HKU1, were abundantly
identified, highlighting previously undemonstrated pathogen diversity in sewage
sludge."

10. "We
Should Expect More out of Our Sewage Sludge" 2015
Jordan Peccia and Paul Westerhoff

Highlights:
" Sludge management practice must shift from treatment of a liability
toward recovery of the embedded energy and chemical assets, while continuing to
protect the environment and human health. This shift will require new research,
treatment technologies and infrastructure and must be guided by the application
of green engineering principles to ensure economic, social, and environmental
sustainability. "

cia and Paul Westerhoffcia and Paul
Westerhoff

11. "Heavy Metal Accumulation in
Small Mammals following Sewage Sludge Application to Forests" 1989Linda J. Hegstrom and Stephen D. West

Highlights:

“Small mammals have been shown to accumulate heavy metals after sewage
sludge was applied to forest lands. Shrews, shrew-moles, and deer mice absorbed
metals from sludge”

12. "Uptake of Polychlorobiphenyls
Present in Trace Amounts from Dried Municipal Sewage Sludge Through an Old
Field Ecosystem" 1981Thomas S. Davis et.al.

Highlights:

“Insects in the
soil absorb toxins, which then accumulate in birds.”

Other Government Reviews not examined by the
so-called Literature Review

Highlights:
"More than 30,000 tons of pharmaceutical drugs are used in Germany
annually. After being used for therapeutic purposes or being disposed of
improperly (in toilets), residues of these drugs end up in municipal sewage
systems. Depending on the sewage treatment methods used, a greater or lesser
portion of the pharmaceutical drug residues removed from sewage are deposited
in sewage sludge. According to a German Advisory Council on the Environment
(Sachverständigenrat für Umweltfragen, SRU) report on pharmaceutical drugs in
the environment, although only a handful of pharmaceutical drugs accumulate in
sewage sludge, it would be advisable to gradually phase out the use of sewage
sludge as a fertilizer so as to avoid diffuse loads of potentially harmful
substances in soil [SRU]."
"Expert reports issued by the German Advisory Council on the Environment
(SRU) concerning pharmaceutical drugs in the environment indicate that the
spread of antibiotic resistance in the environment resulting from resistant
bacteria inputs poses a greater public health hazard than antibiotic inputs per
se [SRU].”
"Sewage sludge fertilizer is a pollution sink for harmful sewage
components from households, businesses and diffuse sources, concerning whose
environmental relevance too little is known. Notwithstanding tighter controls
and stricter limit values for certain sewage sludge pollutants, uncontrolled
pollutants such as hydrocarbons inevitably find their way into the soil.
Incorporation of certain pollutants into the food chain cannot always be
avoided, despite the fact that, for example, plants normally do not absorb
organic pollutants. Nonetheless, new breakdown products of pharmaceutical drugs
are discovered in sewage sludge all the time, and they are incorporated into
sewage sludge via human excretion carried by the wastewater that is treated by
sewage treatment plants."

The official notice from
Switzerland stopping the use of Sewer Sludge on farmland - (note that they cite
the Precautionary Principle)

"Although sludge contains plant nutrients such as phosphorus and
nitrogen it also comprises a whole range of harmful substances and pathogenic
organisms produced by industry and private households. For this reason, most
farmers already avoid using sludge as a fertiliser since they are aware of the
risk of irreversible damage to the soil, the danger to public health and
possible negative effects on the quality of the food they produce. For this
reason the Federal Council plans to ban the use of sludge as a fertiliser, although
this will mean breaking a nutrient cycle which is in itself useful. Prevention
– a key principle of the law on health and the environment – requires, however,
that any consequences for the environment which could be damaging or negative
must be limited as early as possible, even there is no conclusive scientific
evidence for such damage being caused."

Highlights:
"Four samples were positive for the presence of nucleic acids from human
norovirus, two of them being also positive for human adenovirus. Real Time PCR
screening gave positive results for many of the virulence genes characteristic
of diarrheagenic E. coli in 21 samples. These included the Verocytotoxin-coding
genes, in some cases associated with intimin-coding gene, and markers of
enteroaggregative, enterotoxigenic, and enteroinvasive E. coli. CONCLUSIONS:
These results provide evidence that enteric viruses and pathogenic E. coli may
be released into the environment through the use of sludges-derived TSI (what
in Europe they call sewer sludge and manures - Top Soil Improvers )"Our
results highlight that the TSI-related environmental risk for the food chain
should be more deeply assessed."

Highlights:
“Compared to the control soil (which contained around 40 antibiotic resistance
genes), and to the soil fertilised only with chemical fertiliser (which
contained a similar number), treatment with chicken manure (10 tonnes per
hectare — t/ha) and sewage sludge (36 t/ha) more than doubled the number of
antibiotic resistance genes (to around 100)…They also found that the effects
increased with the amount of treatment that was applied… The highest number of
antibiotic resistance genes were detected following sewage sludge treatment (36
t/ha).”

Highlights:
"Based on new microplastics emission estimates in industrialized
countries, we suggest that widespread application of sewage sludge from
municipal wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs) to farmlands is likely to
represent a major input of microplastics to agricultural soils, with unknown
consequences for sustainability and food security."

Highlights:
"microplastics has gained attention as an environmental problem.
Microplastics has been detected in the ocean, in rivers, in effluents from
sewage treatment plants and sewage sludge. It is spread as fine dust in the
air, such as tire wear, as sewage sludge fertilizer and landfill leachate on
the ground, and also with rainwater."

"Our results highlight that the TSI-related environmental risk for the
food chain should be more deeply assessed

Highlights:
"The study highlights potential risks associated with the common practice
of grazing livestock on pastures on which human sewage sludge-derived
fertilizer has been used.”

"More worryingly, since low-level chemical exposure poses a threat to
human reproductive development, the consumption of products from animals
grazing such pastures may be of considerable environmental concern."

"Our results highlight that the TSI-related environmental risk for the
food chain should be more deeply assessed."

ive, enterotoxigenic, and enteroinvasive E. coli.
CONCLUSIONS: These results provide evidence that enteric viruses and pathogenic
E. coli may be released into the environment through the use of sludges-derived
TSI (what in Europe they call sewer sludge and manures - Top Soil Improvers
)"Our results highlight that the TSI-related environmental risk for the
food chain should be more deeply assessed." ive, enterotoxigenic, and
enteroinvasive E. coli.
CONCLUSIONS: These results provide evidence that enteric viruses and pathogenic
E. coli may be released into the environment through the use of sludges-derived
TSI (what in Europe they call sewer sludge and manures - Top Soil Improvers
)"Our results highlight that the TSI-related environmental risk for the
food chain should be more deeply assessed."